[fedora-arm] Daily F-15/17 ARM-Koji Build Stats
f15stats.html :: Sun Feb 26 13:05:01 UTC 2012 -- Mon Feb 27 13:05:02 UTC 2012 Errors UnbuiltDifferent WorkingBuilt --- 569 [0]574 [0]312 [0]1 [0] 8960 [0] f17stats.html :: Sun Feb 26 13:05:01 UTC 2012 -- Mon Feb 27 13:05:02 UTC 2012 Errors UnbuiltDifferent WorkingBuilt --- 382 [+14] 1829 [-112]150 [-2] 5 [0] 8951 [+100] * Different contains packages that are built but have a varying ENVR to that of PA-Koji * Working lists any packages currently being built * The numbers in the brackets show the difference recorded in the counts since the script was last run * http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/~jchiappetta/fxxstats.html * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/ARM/F15_Koji_build ___ arm mailing list arm@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
[fedora-arm] heavybuilders
Hey all, Id like to propose that we setup the heavybuilders to only be the trimslices. just because the local sata disk on the usb bus is faster than the shared scratch storage. packages build quicker on the trimslices since there is much less sontention to the storage and we do have enough of them. arm-koji list-hosts |grep trimslice cdot-trimslice-13-1 Y Y0.0/2.0 arm 2012-02-27 22:04:56 cdot-trimslice-14-1-v7hl Y N6.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-27 22:04:51 hsv-trimslice-10-v5tel N N0.0/2.0 arm - hsv-trimslice-10-v7hlY N6.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-27 22:05:01 hsv-trimslice-6-v5telY Y1.0/2.0 arm 2012-02-27 22:04:47 hsv-trimslice-6-v7hl N N0.0/2.0 armhfp - hsv-trimslice-7-v5telY Y1.5/2.0 arm 2012-02-27 22:04:55 hsv-trimslice-7-v7hl N N0.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-07 19:17:11 hsv-trimslice-8-v5telY N2.0/2.0 arm 2012-02-27 22:04:49 hsv-trimslice-8-v7hl N N0.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-06 18:12:49 hsv-trimslice-9-v5telN N0.0/2.0 arm - hsv-trimslice-9-v7hl Y N2.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-27 22:04:45 I wanted to get others thoughs before i went and made the change Dennis ___ arm mailing list arm@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
Re: [fedora-arm] heavybuilders
On 02/27/2012 02:25 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
[snip]
I wanted to get others thoughs before i went and made the change
Just to be clear, these two systems are the same machines:
hsv-trimslice-9-v5telN N0.0/2.0 arm -
hsv-trimslice-9-v7hl Y N2.0/2.0 armhfp
2012-02-27 22:04:45
We just provision them as v5 or v7 according to what it looks like is
needed. That's the idea anyway- we aren't doing enough builds at once
that we've had to balance anything.
FYI, the HSV pandas also have dedicated sata disks on them and are
roughly the performance equivalent of the trimslices because of it. The
actual tally of heavybuilders (defined as having dedicated usb-sata
storage) is:
hsv-panda-1-v5tel
hsv-panda-2-v5tel
hsv-panda-3-v5tel
hsv-panda-5-v5tel
hsv-panda-6-v5tel
hsv-panda-8-v5tel
cdot-trimslice-13-1
cdot-trimslice-14-1-v7hl
hsv-trimslice-10-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-9-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-8-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-7-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-6-{v5tel,v7hl}
We can make all the HSV trimslices into v7 builders and that will give
us a 6/6 split, which seems reasonable.
--
Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / b...@redhat.com
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
Re: [fedora-arm] heavybuilders cdot-pandas
Does that mean that we will remove the following machines from the
heavybuilder channel or leave those as is?
cdot-panda-10-1-v7hl
cdot-panda-10-4-v7hl
cdot-panda-10-5
cdot-panda-11-4-v7hl
cdot-panda-12-3
cdot-panda-5-3
cdot-panda-5-4
Thanks
Masihul Max Abed
Seneca CDOT
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Brendan Conoboy b...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/27/2012 02:25 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
[snip]
I wanted to get others thoughs before i went and made the change
Just to be clear, these two systems are the same machines:
hsv-trimslice-9-v5telN N0.0/2.0 arm -
hsv-trimslice-9-v7hl Y N2.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-27 22:04:45
We just provision them as v5 or v7 according to what it looks like is
needed. That's the idea anyway- we aren't doing enough builds at once that
we've had to balance anything.
FYI, the HSV pandas also have dedicated sata disks on them and are roughly
the performance equivalent of the trimslices because of it. The actual
tally of heavybuilders (defined as having dedicated usb-sata storage) is:
hsv-panda-1-v5tel
hsv-panda-2-v5tel
hsv-panda-3-v5tel
hsv-panda-5-v5tel
hsv-panda-6-v5tel
hsv-panda-8-v5tel
cdot-trimslice-13-1
cdot-trimslice-14-1-v7hl
hsv-trimslice-10-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-9-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-8-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-7-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-6-{v5tel,v7hl}
We can make all the HSV trimslices into v7 builders and that will give us
a 6/6 split, which seems reasonable.
--
Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / b...@redhat.com
__**_
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.**org/mailman/listinfo/armhttps://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
Re: [fedora-arm] heavybuilders cdot-pandas
El Mon, 27 Feb 2012 18:03:01 -0500
M Abed maxama...@me.com escribió:
Does that mean that we will remove the following machines from the
heavybuilder channel or leave those as is?
cdot-panda-10-1-v7hl
cdot-panda-10-4-v7hl
cdot-panda-10-5
cdot-panda-11-4-v7hl
cdot-panda-12-3
cdot-panda-5-3
cdot-panda-5-4
It would mean they are no longer heavybuilders. we could then drop the
space thats allocated to them in the scratch pool to be smaller.
Dennis
Masihul Max Abed
Seneca CDOT
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Brendan Conoboy b...@redhat.com
wrote:
On 02/27/2012 02:25 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
[snip]
I wanted to get others thoughs before i went and made the change
Just to be clear, these two systems are the same machines:
hsv-trimslice-9-v5telN N0.0/2.0 arm -
hsv-trimslice-9-v7hl Y N2.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-27
22:04:45
We just provision them as v5 or v7 according to what it looks like
is needed. That's the idea anyway- we aren't doing enough builds
at once that we've had to balance anything.
FYI, the HSV pandas also have dedicated sata disks on them and are
roughly the performance equivalent of the trimslices because of
it. The actual tally of heavybuilders (defined as having dedicated
usb-sata storage) is:
hsv-panda-1-v5tel
hsv-panda-2-v5tel
hsv-panda-3-v5tel
hsv-panda-5-v5tel
hsv-panda-6-v5tel
hsv-panda-8-v5tel
cdot-trimslice-13-1
cdot-trimslice-14-1-v7hl
hsv-trimslice-10-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-9-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-8-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-7-{v5tel,v7hl}
hsv-trimslice-6-{v5tel,v7hl}
We can make all the HSV trimslices into v7 builders and that will
give us a 6/6 split, which seems reasonable.
--
Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / b...@redhat.com
__**_
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.**org/mailman/listinfo/armhttps://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
___
arm mailing list
arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
Re: [fedora-arm] heavybuilders
On 02/27/2012 10:25 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: Hey all, Id like to propose that we setup the heavybuilders to only be the trimslices. just because the local sata disk on the usb bus is faster than the shared scratch storage. packages build quicker on the trimslices since there is much less sontention to the storage and we do have enough of them. arm-koji list-hosts |grep trimslice cdot-trimslice-13-1 Y Y0.0/2.0 arm 2012-02-27 22:04:56 cdot-trimslice-14-1-v7hl Y N6.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-27 22:04:51 hsv-trimslice-10-v5tel N N0.0/2.0 arm - hsv-trimslice-10-v7hlY N6.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-27 22:05:01 hsv-trimslice-6-v5telY Y1.0/2.0 arm 2012-02-27 22:04:47 hsv-trimslice-6-v7hl N N0.0/2.0 armhfp - hsv-trimslice-7-v5telY Y1.5/2.0 arm 2012-02-27 22:04:55 hsv-trimslice-7-v7hl N N0.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-07 19:17:11 hsv-trimslice-8-v5telY N2.0/2.0 arm 2012-02-27 22:04:49 hsv-trimslice-8-v7hl N N0.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-06 18:12:49 hsv-trimslice-9-v5telN N0.0/2.0 arm - hsv-trimslice-9-v7hl Y N2.0/2.0 armhfp 2012-02-27 22:04:45 I wanted to get others thoughs before i went and made the change You may want to look into the SuperTalent RC8 USB SSD for the other builders - as far as my research went it is as good as you are going to get on an machine with no native SATA: http://www.altechnative.net/2012/01/25/flash-module-benchmark-collection-sd-cards-cf-cards-usb-sticks/ Gordan ___ arm mailing list arm@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
